Bitch Media - sexualizationhttp://bitchmagazine.org/taxonomy/term/4387/0
enIn The Frame: An Interview with The Girlshttp://bitchmagazine.org/post/in-the-frame-an-interview-with-artist-duo-the-girls
<p>Together, Andrea Blood and Zoe Sinclair are known as <a href="http://www.thegirls.co.uk/"target="_blank">The Girls</a>—an artistic partnership that has revolved around intense tableaux self-portraits, live performances, videos and installations. Along with exhibiting regularly in the UK, they've shown at the Los Angeles Center for Digital Art and Milan's UNO+UNO. Whether they're taking on recognizable people and reimagining them, or creating entirely new and vibrant characters, you're sure to be drawn in.</p>
<p>I volunteered as a contributor during their 2010 project, <em>The Paper Eaters: Long Live the Photo Story</em>, which took place inside the London department store Selfridges, and it saw a basement space transformed into a working office and participatory installation where they produced several issues of their own magazine. This paid tribute to the golden age of publications for teens and children, with problem pages, photo stories and craft articles. They went on to create similar live studio experiences in a shopping mall and in London's Tate Britain.</p>
<p>I wanted to quiz The Girls about their most controversial pieces, their future projects, and how feminism fits into the picture.</p>
<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7157/6537443471_e4bbe3874b.jpg" alt="the girls, two white women, wearing wigs and posing as Princes William and Harry" width="386" height="500" /></p>
<p><em>[The Girls, William and Harry].</em></p>
<p><strong>How long does it take (on average) to prepare for one of your tableaux? </strong></p>
<p>Andrea: That really depends on what we're doing. Sometimes it could be a matter of days and at other times, weeks!</p>
<p><strong>Do you prefer representing invented characters or real figures (such as your portrait of Prince William and Prince Harry)? </strong></p>
<p>A: There are pluses and minuses of doing both; it's fun to create an instantly recognizable figure and play with that, but on the other hand an invented character allows so much more creative freedom.</p>
<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7173/6537443693_e85d202356.jpg" alt="one of the girls as jonbenet ramsay wearing a wig and tiara and looking at the camera" width="386" height="500" /> <img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7027/6537443571_707dc4f384_m.jpg" alt="one of the girls as Myra Hindley in a mug shot looking at the camera" width="186" height="240" /></p>
<p><em>[The Girls, JonBenet Portrait and Myra Hindley Portrait]. </em></p>
<p><strong>I particularly love your controversial portraits of JonBenet Ramsay (the child beauty pageant winner murdered in 1996) and Myra Hindley (murderess, whose police mug shot is chilling and famous in its own right). Was it difficult to move into a more morbid theme, or was it something you felt you had to do? And what kind of reaction did you get for both of these images?</strong>
</p>
<p>A: It was not difficult at all. And if anything that natural urge to make things a little darker and less comfortable than what they could be was one of the fundamental reasons we became friends and collaborators when this all began. When the Myra Hindley piece was shown in Selfridges Ultralounge 2010 it caused quite a stir and we had several complaints. One woman in particular complained every day. However I took the time with her to explain our reasons behind that piece and the pieces like JonBenet and she came away with a completely different perspective and was quite supportive.</p>
<p>Z: Being morbid has always come easily to us!</p>
<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7005/6537443815_61f80509a9_o.jpg" alt="The Girls behind a table smiling at a computer. In front of the table are large letters that say Photo Story The Enemy is Time" width="500" height="333" /></p>
<p><em>[Zoe and Andrea, a.k.a. The Girls, at work on The Paper Eaters Magazine in Selfridges, 2010. Photo by Helen Jermyn].</em></p>
<p><strong>In light of <em>The Paper Eaters</em> project and its references to teen magazines from the '80s, do you think that girls grow up too quickly today and they don't have the innocence of previous generations, or are we all just worrying too much, Daily Mail-style? [The Daily Mail is a British newspaper which has frequently been accused of scare-mongering tactics to generate headlines]. </strong></p>
<p>A: I think the worry is completely justified and the subject doesn't get enough media attention. We need more in depth exposure and analysis from some harder hitting editorials rather than the sensational lip service granted by <em>The Daily Mail</em> and co. It's a subject that we both feel very strongly about and anything we can do to raise awareness or help towards an actual positive change would be welcomed by us.</p>
<p>Z: This is a massive, real concern to us. I think Caitlin Moran highlighted it well in her recent book <em>How to be a Woman</em>—some teenage boys are horrified when teenage girls don't wax their pubic hair off. This is due to the prevalence of porn. What an awful start this would be to your sex life, this ridiculous and eerie expectation!</p>
<p>At my all girls grammar school, in the 1990's, we were taught NOTHING about: female orgasm, the clitoris, the emotional aspects of sex, how to assert yourself in a sexual relationship, date rape, or where to get an abortion. I wonder how much has changed in the classroom? At the UK Feminista FEM 11 conference in London in November we heard worrying stories about how a tiny minority of right-wing parents can block schools from being able to give teenagers this kind of information.</p>
<p><strong>How has being feminists affected your art—do you find yourself consciously trying to break down barriers, or can you separate being a feminist from being an artist? </strong></p>
<p>A: I don't perceive there to be any barriers in place for us based on our gender alone. I do feel that we have a platform to raise feminist issues that we feel passionately about and doing that through art and humour is effective and appealing. As an artist you concentrate on subjects that interest you, so there is a feminist theme throughout a lot of our work. It's hard to say when this became a conscious action as it's a lot to do with how we've been brought up, and subjects that affect us on a personal level as much as them universally affecting women.</p>
<p><strong>Do you think that mainstream art will always be controlled by men and the male gaze, or are we experiencing a shift towards equality? </strong></p>
<p>A: There's still a long way to go before equality across the board is reached, but at the same time things have never been better for female artists and art; that's something to be grateful for. I think it's up to the female artists of today to make space for themselves and make themselves heard.</p>
<p>Z: As more and more women artists are able to have more time to devote themselves to their practice, we will see growing numbers of women rising to the top.</p>
<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7153/6537479237_ddbe98d215.jpg" alt="nude white woman on a picnic table covered in snacks. A priest is serving himself some of the snacks" width="500" height="323" /></p>
<p>[<em>"Nyotaimori, Vicar?" The Garden Party performance by The Girls</em>]</p>
<p><strong>Which other artists inspire you? </strong></p>
<p>Z: Grayson Perry—for making the world a more interesting place, for his humour and openness, and the way he has dealt with the snobbery of the art world.</p>
<p>A: The world wouldn't be the same without Yayoi Kusama either. We're looking forward to <a href="http://tate.org.uk/modern/exhibitions/yayoikusama/default.shtm"target="_blank">her show at Tate Modern in 2012</a>.</p>
<p><strong>What advice would you give to female artists who are just starting out? </strong></p>
<p>A: Just the same advice as I'd give to any artist: hone your craft, don't settle for anything less than excellence, don't make excuses, and work hard.</p>
<p>Z: Think carefully about how you will support yourself alongside your practice. Choose your romantic partner very carefully! Look after your mental health as well as your physical health. Avoid discussing your practice with anyone who continually makes you feel inadequate.</p>
<p><strong>What can we expect to see from The Girls in 2012? </strong></p>
<p>A &amp; Z: We're busy in the planning stages of some new work right now, so you can expect to see the result of that in the summer of 2012.</p>
<p><strong>Previously:</strong> <a href="/post/votes-for-women-99-percent-wealth-suffrage-feminism-art"target="_blank">Votes for Women and Tackling the 1%</a>, <a href="/post/in-the-frame-art-therapy-feminism"target="_blank">Art Therapy</a></p>
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/in-the-frame-an-interview-with-artist-duo-the-girls#commentsartcontroversialfemale artistsfemale photographersJonBenet Ramsayphotographysexualizationteenage girlhoodThe GirlsArt and DesignMon, 19 Dec 2011 18:47:19 +0000Polly Allen14268 at http://bitchmagazine.orgMom & Pop Culture: Dealing With The Halloween Hangoverhttp://bitchmagazine.org/post/mom-pop-culture-dealing-with-the-halloween-hangover
<p>As a kid, Halloween is pretty much the Best Holiday Ever. As an adult with a young child? Halloween starts to become pretty scary. And I'm not talking hidden-razors-in-your-candy bar scary.</p>
<p>Every year, about a month or two before Halloween, our house starts getting costume catalogues in the mail. I've never signed up for these wastes of paper and have no clue how we began getting them, but they never fail to arrive in my mailbox. Some of the costumes are totally fine and lovely. I mean, how can anyone find fault in an adorably furry lion costume for a baby? Baby sushi? Yes, please. But the further I flip through the catalogue, the more uneasy I get. Do all the branded costumes upset me? Sure. I absolutely hate how companies try to squeeze every last penny out of parents by marketing characters wherever they can (costumes, lunch boxes, clothing, toys, food, etc...). But, in this instance it's not the Elmos and Buzz Lightyears that make me cringe.</p>
<p>Instead, it's the way that Halloween has devolved to the point where companies are marketing sexualized versions of costumes to toddlers, young kids, and tweens. In contrast to the age-old witch costume of long black dress and hat, there are versions with bustiers (for girls with nothing yet to boost!) and lace arm "warmers."</p>
<p><img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6091/6300854644_36dc3d6275.jpg" alt="A young girl in a 2011 Witch Costume, complete with corset and lace arms. She is standing with her arm on her hip" height="480" width="380" /></p>
<p>By contrast, here I am as a witch: (the dress goes from neck to below my knees) in 1990. Why yes, the attitude was part of the costume.</p>
<p><img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6041/6300321227_8dfee5e24b.jpg" alt="A picture of the author at 10 years old sticking her tongue out in a more conservative withc costume" height="333" width="500" /></p>
<p>I'm not sure what a "Ravager" is, but it apparently <a href="http://www.spirithalloween.com/product/black-ravager-child-costume/" target="_blank">involves short skirts, fishnet stockings and a buckle corset</a>. The <a href="http://www.spirithalloween.com/product/rb-spongebabe-girl-child-md/" target="_blank">"Spongebabe Costume" </a> costume takes all the guess work out of it. They don't even attempt to pretend it's anything less than it is.</p>
<p>It doesn't stop there. Many of these costumes go out of their way to make skirts shorter than necessary, create the illusion of cleavage/busts where none will be for a few more years, and in general, sell a little sex to those way too young to fully grasp the concept. Even the ads themselves are attempting to sell sex along with dress-up. Non-existent hips jut out, painted lips purse and pout, all in the hopes of selling these costumes that have no place on little bodies.</p>
<p>I have no qualms with adults wanting to use Halloween as a time to strip down and sex it up. If a sexy kitty or nurse is your thing, go for it! I'd appreciate a little more effort and diversity from costume companies that market to adults, but at least adults have the ability to understand what they're choosing to be. An adult understands the meaning behind a "sexy candy corn costume" (<a href="http://www.spirithalloween.com/product/sexy-kandy-korn-witch-adult-costume/" target="_blank">and yes, that actually exists</a>). But why do companies feel it is alright to try and sell <a href="http://www.spirithalloween.com/product/kandy-korn-witch-costume/" target="_blank">kiddy versions of the same thing</a>?</p>
<p>Whatever happened to allowing kids to be kids? When did this need to sexualize costumes at younger and younger ages happen? I still remember my mother forcing me to wear a turtleneck underneath my genie costume at age 8. Yet, it seems like skirts that barely cover bums, sheer or fishnet stockings and corset-like tops are the norm for costumes geared toward young girls.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/28/living/sexy-costumes-kids/index.html" target="_blank">CNN recently reported on this phenomenon as well</a>. But why did it take having a reporter actually experience this with her daughter to have a large media outlet finally start talking about it? However the article came to be, they zeroed in on one of the biggest ramifications of these sorts of costumes:</p>
<blockquote><p>"Dressing girls like grown women for Halloween communicates that they have the sexuality of adults, in the bodies of children," says Teresa Downing-Matibag, an assistant professor of sociology at Iowa State University. "While little girls themselves likely have very little awareness of adult or even adolescent sexuality, or what sex is really about, the adults who are seeing them on the streets do. We are also communicating to adults that little girls are sexually appealing, and this message has tragic implications for their vulnerability to sexual abuse."</p></blockquote>
<p>Boys aren't immune either. While nobody is marketing "sexy cowboys" (yet), there are still some costumes out there that promote body ideals like overly developed muscles to young boys. My son wanted to be Superman for Halloween this year (actually, he wanted to be Superman dressed as a pirate, but we still needed a Superman costume). We ended up at a big box store, staring at the various superhero costumes. One was a basic Superman costume that could be worn over clothing. It had the emblem on the chest and the cape attached to the back. The other version of Superman (the more expensive one, actually) had foam muscles built into the costume.</p>
<p>Superman wasn't the only costume that had gotten a little injection of the juice. Spiderman and Batman also had dual versions of the costume<span class="st">—</span>one "regular" and one promoting this ideal version of what the male body should look like. It may be more subtle than a "Sexy Kitten" costume, but these pumped up versions of costumes for young boys still present their own set of issues. Thankfully, my son chose to go with the regular costume, loudly declaring the fake muscles on the other one as "kind of weird." And indeed, he wore his Superman costume proudly on Halloween, (and around town for ice cream in the week before) infusing his own brand of creativity into it with structural homages to Batman and vampires as well.</p>
<p>Halloween is a time to bust out that creativity, play into the fantasy, and eat a ton of candy. It's not a time to push adult sexuality or hyped-up ideas of ideal bodies onto young kids. I'd rather by scared on Halloween by ghosts and goblins than by <a href="http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/31/sexy-costumes-for-little-girls-arent-cute/" target="_blank">thoughts of little kids running amok in overly sexualized costumes</a>.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Previously: </strong><a href="/post/mom-pop-culture-serving-up-a-feminist-parenting-perspective" target="_blank">Serviing Up A Feminist Parenting Perspective</a></p>
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/mom-pop-culture-dealing-with-the-halloween-hangover#commentscostumeshalloweenkidsParentingsexualizationSocial CommentaryWed, 02 Nov 2011 19:06:12 +0000Avital Norman Nathman13403 at http://bitchmagazine.orgDouchebag Decree: Monster Highhttp://bitchmagazine.org/post/douchebag-decree-monster-high
<p><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3214/3008635758_a8c6604670.jpg" alt="douchedecree" width="494" height="199" /></p>
<p>Sometimes, products are all the more disappointing when they sounded pretty cool at first.</p>
<p>Case in point: Mattel's blockbuster franchise, Monster High. This series of dolls is centered around the children (mostly daughters) of werewolves, mummies and other classic beasties of horror tales. When <a title="The New York Times: As Girls Flock to Comic-Con, Marketers Woo Them" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/11/business/media/11adco.html?_r=2">speaking about</a> the franchise to the <em>New York Times</em>, Tim Kilpin of Mattel said, "Who doesn't feel like a freak in high school? It started with that universal truth." Of course, high schoolers aren't Mattel's target market; in fact, most Monster High products are officially listed as <a title="Mattel: Buy Monster High Dolls, Filter Age 6-8" href="http://shop.mattel.com/family/index.jsp?categoryId=4315974&amp;f=PAD%2FAge%2F6-8">"Age 6-8."</a> Still, dolls that promote not buying into superficial mainstream standards would be neat, right?</p>
<p>Yeah, they would. Too bad that's not what's happening here.</p>
<p><img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5309/5641218223_425092d089.jpg" alt="monster high dolls, via api.ning" width="500" height="273" /></p>
<p><em>Look again: They're not Bratz. </em>(<a href="http://api.ning.com/files/QaoESnkxbYhJIxfXU3hEzGYAmz0MrY0Xdinu45yi5*2kmZqMlOqvktxZI7KnX-k0tuEW4bJe-P6lpixbbw0N2WsMqT1ZDITd/035.JPG">picture source</a>)</p>
<p>Well, what do you know? Hypersexualized, heavily made-up dolls with über-Barbie proportions. Not only are their waists much narrower than their heads; they're close to the size of one of their calves. The ladies are homogeneous in height, shorter than their few male counterparts so as not to be intimidating. The designated nerd, zombie Ghoulia (third from the right), is the only female to come with a pair of pants; mummy Cleo de Nile (second from right) appears to at first glance but is actually clad in strips of fabric prone to gaps and <a title="Monster High profile: Cleo de Nile" href="http://www.monsterhigh.com/bios/cleo">wink-wink</a> wardrobe malfunctions. (She also supplies those of us who remember <em><a title="Clone High: Characters (Their Cleopatra is third from the bottom.)" href="http://www.clone-high.com/characters.htm">Clone High</a> </em>with a serious case of déjà vu.)</p>
<p>These are the quintessential high school outcasts? Most of the characters, from the personae established by the ridiculous <a title="Monster High home" href="http://www.monsterhigh.com/home?mh">website</a>, TV special, <a title="YouTube profile: MonsterHigh" href="http://www.youtube.com/user/MonsterHigh">webisodes</a> and tie-in books by <em>The Clique </em>author Lisi Harrison, are popular cheerleaders. Monster High's tagline is "Freaky just got fabulous," which manages to be at once uncomfortably suggestive, insulting, and materialistic. "Fabulous" denotes fashion, and even if "freaky" is only supposed to signify that some of the characters are pseudo-weirdos, this sends the message that unusual girls are only interesting if they are fashionable. While some would be quick to say that clothing is the point of dolls in the first place, I'd argue that the best use of such figurines is as a springboard for imagination. What were Barbies, Polly Pockets, or even G.I. Joes ever for if not do-it-yourself storytelling?</p>
<p><img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5062/5642217148_515ddf958c.jpg" alt="cottonmonster, via TreeHugger" width="432" height="350" /></p>
<p><em>My dolls could've had plenty of adventures with <a title="TreeHugger: Cotton Monsters" href="http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/05/cotton_monsters.php">THIS monster</a>.</em></p>
<p>While the copious unnecessary branches of Monster High differ, all seem to feature <a title="Monster High profile: Frankie Stein" href="http://www.monsterhigh.com/bios/frankie">Frankie Stein</a> as the new girl at school. Perhaps this is where the dubious outcast claim is based, because, y'know: she's nervous, insecure and just starting to make friends. She's also fifteen <em>days</em> old.</p>
<p>In fact, there's a lot of weirdness happening when it comes to age. While I get what Mattel was going for (vampires are immortal, blah blah blah) I can't help but cringe when, say, a sixteen-year-old <a title="Monster High profile: Deuce Gorgon" href="http://www.monsterhigh.com/bios/deuce">son of Medusa</a> is dating a six-thousand-year-old. Likewise, while I personally like a good faux-goth plaid skirt, sexifying a creature who is basically an infant is <a title="Bitch: Douchebag Decree: geoGirl's Anti-Aging Makeup for Preteens" href="/post/douchebag-decree-geogirl">well-documented</a> to be a <a title="Bitch: Heels for babes!" href="/post/heels-for-babes">bad idea</a>. Reducing both old and young females to a shallow realm of teenagedom is, um, not ideal.</p>
<p>And <em>what </em>a shallow realm it is. In between proclaiming their passions for "checking out the bro's [sic]," "flirting with the boys!" and "the most creeporific guy" (that last courtesy of young Frankie Stein), the characters' <a title="Monster High: Students" href="http://www.monsterhigh.com/bios">Facebook-esque online profiles</a> further work the emphasis on appearance. Check out these gems, from vampire Draculaura and werewolf Clawdeen respectively:</p>
<blockquote><p>Freaky Flaw: Since I can't see my reflection in a mirror, I have to leave the house not knowing if my clothes and makeup are just right. Of course after 1,599 years of practice I've gotten pretty good at it.</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>Freaky Flaw: My hair is worthy of a shampoo commercial and that's just what grows on my legs. Plucking and shaving is definitely a full time job but that's a small price to pay for being scarily fabulous.</p></blockquote>
<p>Oh, dear. What better way to spend days or years than laboring to cram oneself into the narrow body standard du jour? Lisa Lusero's piece in <a title="Revolutionary Readings home" href="http://www.revolutionaryreadings.com/"><em>Revolutionary Voices</em></a>, in which a little boy asks why she has hair on her legs and she retorts that it grows there, comes to mind. Not that folks of any age <em>should </em>be worrying about their body hair, but pushing big beauty companies' agenda onto (pre-)pre-pubescents is rather awful. There is nothing "freaky" about hairy legs, nor do they nix fabulousness, if that matters to you. So, 6-8 year olds: Have you learned to hate your bodies yet?</p>
<p>No? Don't worry, the <em>Monster High</em> web series has you covered with this charmer:</p>
<p><object width="640" height="390">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gwPsGrgV1IY?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gwPsGrgV1IY?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="390">
</embed></object></p>
<p><em>Warning: Contains body shame and terrible music.</em></p>
<p>On the less-sucky side, said profiles include a space for "Favorite School Subject," so these high school students actually do occasionally mention, y'know, school. While most of their answers are based in the monster gimmick (eg. Cleo likes geometry because shapes=pyramids=Egypt, geddit?) they are legitimate subjects, so that's something. Then there's the fact that the main players aren't all coded as white, as I feared when I first saw the sherbet-y skin of Draculaura and Lagoona Blue. Both Cleo de Nile and Clawdeen Wolf appear to be women of color.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the two of them are written as the most vicious in the group. They also <a title="YouTube video: Monster High(TM) - Clawditions" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sav83jK-U9Y&amp;feature=channel_video_title">hate each other</a>.</p>
<p>So, what's more disheartening: the failure of a pretty good premise or the fact that it's hardly even surprising anymore? After <a title="Bitch: Under the knife: A thinner, sexier Strawberry Shortcake and Care Bears" href="/post/under-the-knife-a-thinner-sexier-strawberry-shortcake-and-care-bears">the epic slimming down</a> of Strawberry Shortcake, Angelina Ballerina and, yes, even the Care Bears (don't get me started), absurdly bodied, appearance-obsessed monster offspring are disappointing but almost par for the <a title="Bitch: Mad World: Toy Ads and Learning Gender" href="/post/mad-world-toy-ads-and-learning-gender">Toys R Us course</a>. And I don't know about you, but I find that pretty scary.</p>
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/douchebag-decree-monster-high#commentsdollsDouchebag Decreemattelsexualizationteenage girlhoodtoysSocial CommentaryThu, 28 Apr 2011 19:28:43 +0000Deb Jannerson9841 at http://bitchmagazine.orgOn the Map: Breastfeeding is Best for Baby... But for Babydolls?http://bitchmagazine.org/post/breastfeeding-is-best-for-baby-but-for-babydolls
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fqYoZVroBZs&amp;rel=0&amp;color1=0xb1b1b1&amp;color2=0xcfcfcf&amp;feature=player_embedded&amp;fs=1" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fqYoZVroBZs&amp;rel=0&amp;color1=0xb1b1b1&amp;color2=0xcfcfcf&amp;feature=player_embedded&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><p>
I find the controversy in recent years surrounding public breastfeeding in the United States to be indicative of American over-saturation of the male view of breasts as a sexual object instead of something that serve the function of nurturing a child. Despite breast milk being the healthiest (and cheapest!) way to feed a baby while providing numerous short- and long-term benefits for the child (better immune system, higher intelligence, less likelihood of developing allergic diseases) and mother (reduction of uterine bleeding, natural postpartum contraception, reduced risk of several cancers and heart disease), many Americans still can't get past the part of the medium of delivery being a pair of engorged tits.
</p>
<p>
In the mid-1950s, breastfeeding in the US dropped to nearly 20% and a group of concerned women stepped up to bat for the benefits of breastmilk; that group was <a href="http://www.llli.org/ab.html?m=1">La Leche League</a>. These days that rate has nearly flipped with three-quarters of American women initiating breastfeeding at birth, but this number <a href="http://mediamum.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/breastfeeding-in-america/">slowly declines to just 25%</a> a year after the child's birth. Evidence that we might not have come as far as we think.
</p>
<p>
Perhaps it's this equating of the breast as a solely sexual object that has gotten Spanish dollmaker <a href="http://berjuan.com/flash/">Berjuan</a>'s Bebé Glotón (Baby Glutton) so much American media attention over the past few days. Despite the doll not being sold in the States (yet), the US media has run 165 articles compared to only 14 in Spain, which tells me this controvery is more about American culture than it is about consumerism.
</p>
<p>
Two somewhat conflicting feminist arguments can be made about the doll: 1) it promotes little girls playing the role of &quot;mommy&quot; for a newborn baby and reinforces motherhood as expected and ideal and 2) it reinforces breastfeeding as a natural element of child rearing, decreasing the culture of shame surrounding this women's issue.
</p>
<p>
Though some have raised these issues, these aren't the arguments several journalists and television personalities are making against the Bebé.
</p>
<p>
On the <i>Today Show</i>, Hoda Kotb and Kathie Lee Gifford exchanged comments of incredulity: "Why would you want a suckling doll for an 8-year-old?" asks Kotb. &quot;It's got a little creep factor,&quot; says Gifford.
</p>
<p>
NJ.com's Eric Ruhalter was <a href="http://www.nj.com/parenting/eric_ruhalter/index.ssf/2009/08/breastfeeding_doll_debate_dad.html">made to apologize</a> for his comparisons of Bebé Glotón to an alcoholic doll, one that has erectile dysfunction, or a doll that is the victim of prison rape.
</p>
<p>
And in <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,537261,00.html">Fox News' typical outrageous style</a>, the network suggests Bebé Glotón &quot;may even promote early pregnancy&quot; by &quot;speed[ing] up maternal urges in the little girls who play it.&quot; Their health editor goes so far as to compare playing with the doll to &quot;introducing sex education in first grade&quot; and says &quot;it could inadvertently lead little girls to become traumatized.&quot;
</p>
<p>
Am I the only one who thinks it's unbelievable that Ruhalter's article made it past his editor? And I dunno about you, but the idea of girls being traumatized by a breastfeeding doll seems more than a little extreme. (Berjuan did <a href="http://news.google.co.in/news/url?sa=t&amp;ct2=in%2F0_0_s_5_0_t&amp;usg=AFQjCNEHFFnHyB7Fi17hvSotzx8gyV9NRw&amp;cid=1290673033&amp;ei=RemESriOA43-7AP95uIo&amp;rt=MORE_COVERAGE&amp;vm=STANDARD&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abcnews.go.com%2FHealth%2FParenting%2Fstory%3Fid%3D8271555%26page%3D1">consult with psychologists</a> and teachers in developing the toy.) The bulk of the objections seem to revolve around Bebé Glotón not being age-appropriate, but this completely disregards the difference between adults' and children's sexual comprehension. There are also few indications given as to <i>why</i> people believe the doll may not be age-appropriate (save for Fox's ridiculous exaggeration) leaving much to be desired in the way of explanation; the statement is simply taken as &quot;the truth&quot;--and that's that.
</p>
<p>
But <i>that</i>, quite frankly, isn't good enough. It's irresponsible journalism to present something as &quot;fact&quot; having no evidence except opinion to back it up. This is especially conspicuous when considering the implications these types of stories have in furthering the notion that breastfeeding is a sexual act, particularly when the faux-feeder is a five-year-old girl. You see, the US media can't talk about what is <i>really</i> bothering them because then they'd have to admit that our culture sexualizes children. And if they admit that's the case, then they're slipping down a slope they don't want to be on. Because that slope is the staunchly the intellectual property of feminism.
</p>
<p>
So instead of engaging in an active debate, these media folks continue to stick to the status quo: Bratz in fishnets, short skirts, and stilettos are okay for little girls to play with because that's just make believe, but a breastfeeding doll isn't good for them because that's too &quot;adult&quot;. I like that Bebé Glotón is encouraging some Americans to take an introspective look at their hangups about breasts and sexuality, but I can't say I'm enamored with our shoddy media analysis.</p>
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/breastfeeding-is-best-for-baby-but-for-babydolls#commentsBebé GlotónbreastfeedingdollsexualizationSpainSex and SexualityFri, 14 Aug 2009 06:49:24 +0000Mandy Van Deven2015 at http://bitchmagazine.org